Quote:
Originally Posted by dobbles
Doesn't any of that paragraph strike you as a bit backwards? To me, if I have a player that is the best at scoring goals and points in the main developmental league for the NHL, shouldn't I be trying to find a place for him on my roster? Obviously, there is merit to working on parts of your game. No one wants to follow the Edmonton model of top line scores 100 goals but gives up 110. But outside of extremes, shouldn't NHL teams and coaches be better at integrating guys that can score?
Some of this is probably a little OT, but to me its mainly this weird idea we have developed in hockey that you have a couple scoring lines but then a couple of lines that just play defense or grind against the other teams version of that line. It seems weird to me that as a hockey team you don't want to put out 4 lines that are all trying to score. Because of that, there are plenty of tweener players that could have an impact but don't get a chance because some giant slow as molasses player needs to glide around the ice for 8 minutes a game and 'intimidate' the other teams line of slow ogres that is also out there to intimidate. (ok, laying it on pretty thick there, but I was on a roll so I went for it!)
Again, I just think of this as any job, company, industry outside of sports. Say I hire a new guy on for a sales role. They are a decent salesman but really enjoy making up print materials to give to their prospects. Instead of saying 'stop making print materials and focus on your closing pitches' I am inclined to see if the employee wants to move into a marketing role or be the promo creator for the whole sales team. I want to maximize the employees I have, not force them to spend their career focusing on their weaknesses at the expense of their strengths.
(Also, I do know often the AHL scoring leaders are slightly older guys that are not NHL prospects. AHL scoring is obviously not everything. But when someone is excelling against their peers and being the best at what actually wins games, I think that says something.)
|
I'd assume that if Treliving and Sutter felt that Phillips would improve the team's offence from the top nine they have they would have already made the move.
They (rightly or wrongly) have determined (to this point) that his offence isn't translatable to the next level.
They're trying to win, they will make bad calls, but I don't think they're avoiding improving their team.
The issues with the four scoring lines ...
1) Size of the pie - only so many five on five minutes to go around. If your fourth line is suddenly somewhat prominent you have to give them more than 7 minutes and that takes away from the higher paid players on your roster.
2) Salary Cap - you can't afford 12 scoring hockey players on a roster. There isn't the financial space to do it.
So with that you need cheap players (I realize Lucic isn't cheap, that's a sunk cost on a Neal signing) and they can't play a lot so you don't want them to be prospects that will get stunted.